Posted
by
kdawson
on Tuesday June 02, 2009 @05:39PM
from the crash-diet dept.

An anonymous reader writes in to note that GM will sell its Hummer brand to Sichuan Tengzhong Heavy Industrial Machinery Co. of China, a little-known industrial firm. For now, the deal will save 3,000 jobs in the US. (The military HumVees are made by a separate company and are not involved in this deal.) "As part of the deal, some GM plants will continue to build the Hummer brand for the new owner, at least for awhile. The company said its Shreveport, La., plant will keep building Hummers for the new owner until at least 2010. ... GM said it sold 5,013 Hummers worldwide in the first quarter, down 62% from the 13,050 that it sold in the same period the prior year." AP coverage has more details on GM's planned divestitures, including the shedding of Pontiac, Saturn, and Saab.

The original Hummer, HMMWV, is still produced by AM General. GM never produced Humvees for the military. The H1 version of the Hummer was produced by AM General as well, but marketed by GM, and was based off the Humvee design. The H2 and H3 were basically a Suburban chassis with an body that bastardized the HMMWV body design.

At least the H2 shares some similarities with the H1 model. The H3 model is just trash.

Before you worry about soldiers of US army and marines riding on Chinese made jeeps, you should also note that GM China has made recorded sales in China, despite of its parent's woe in the US. I personally did notice quite a lot more Buick's running in the city of Shenzhen than on the streets of California. When I was over there, I owned a Buick myself which was made in China but with US-made engines and transmissions; whereas i own a Japanese car here in California. Strange world.

Why is it edited away? Is / . censoring our post, because the news of american company doing well in China does not fit the site's editorial agenda?

Well, compared to Japanase/Korean/European engines, the engines built in the US aren't particularly well-known for their sophistication or efficiency. Just for their cubic inches. Seeing that some European 1.6 litre 4-cylinder engines already churn out 275 bhp and 240 Nm, 350 bhp from a 4+ litre V8 isn't particularly impressive. Especially if you look at the mileage.

The American economy recovered from the great depression by draining UK's coffers via the lend-lease act. That recovery turned into a boom which lasted nearly 50 years.

The current Chinese boom is a result of draining America's coffers. Its only a matter of time before the Chinese economy becomes self sustaining and they won't need us anymore. I'm afraid of what will happen when China becomes the new superpower and America takes up France's position of Ex-Superpower Turned Whiney Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys...

The American economy recovered from the great depression by draining UK's coffers via the lend-lease act.

Before reading your comment, I didn't really know anything about the lend-lease act. It was one of those terms I had heard, but didn't know the specifics of. Your comment prompted me to do some reading (wikipedia). And I think I can say that without a doubt you don't know what you're talking about (assuming the information on Lend-Lease [wikipedia.org] is accurate at the time I read it).

From the article:

Lend-Lease (Public Law 77-11)[1] was the name of the program under which the United States of America supplied the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, China, France and other Allied nations with vast amounts of war material between 1941 and 1945 in return for, in the case of Britain, military bases in Newfoundland, Bermuda, and the British West Indies.

And further:

In sharp contrast to the American loans to the Allies in World War I, there were no provisions for postwar repayments.

So, technically the lend-lease act was not in any way any sort of drain on British coffers (quite the reverse actually). Now, after the war the "... Anglo-American loan came about. Lend-lease items retained were sold to Britain at the knockdown price of about 10 cents on the dollar giving an initial value of £1,075 million. Payment was to be stretched out over 50 years at 2% interest." That hardly sounds like any sort of drain to me... I'd love to get a million dollar home for $100,000 and then only have to pay it back at 2% over 50 years. And in fact, at least one member of the House of Lords agrees with me (emphasis mine):

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the loan originally was £1,075 million, of which £244 million is outstanding. The basis of the loan is that interest is paid at 2 per cent. Therefore, we are currently receiving a greater return on our dollar assets than we are paying in interest to pay off the loan. It is a very advantageous loan for us.

China becomes the new superpower and America takes up France's position of Ex-Superpower Turned Whiney Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys...

Uhh, I live in one of France's neighbouring countries and have to say that I rather have a bunch of cheese eating (especially since they have excellent cheese, but I digress) surrender monkeys then a congregation of war mongering torturers with dellusional tendencies as neighbors.

Britain was nearly bankrupt for the next decade -- there was still rationing five years after the war. And the US made out extremely well -- the British even had to devalue their currency while they were borrowing money. They were less able to invest in infrastructure than the French and Germans, and the long term consequences for British industry (the world's most advanced from about 1850-1930) were severe.

The UK made its last repayment at the end of 2006. This is an article [bbc.co.uk] from the Beeb about it. Interestingly, there are still WW1 debts still outstanding, which "Adjusted by the Retail Price Index, a typical measure of inflation, £866m would equate to £40bn now, and if adjusted by the growth of GDP, to about £225bn."

You can compare this with 1805 when the Battle of Trafalgar occurred. British government debt then equated 30 times their annual revenue. By winning that battle though, Britain become the dominant power, and presumably paid of the debts of all the wars by plundering the rest of the world.

Quibble: it was the UK, not England, that received the loans from the US.

(bear in mind you may not be one of the protected (USA IT/college educated) class that you are now, and this is a nonreversible, binding decision)

Huh? You are saying that I choose between what I am now, or lower class in China? Or are you saying that I choose between lower class in the US vs middle class in China? Having been over there a few times, I can tell you that the middle class there lives better than the poor here. If I had to choose between a job here or a job there of the same level and bot

Think of the consequences, of an oppressive state, that willingly attacks anyone (esp. cyber attacks), blackmails its neighbours (over North Korea), and completely ignores any laws on copyright

Sorry, could you specify whether you're referring to China, or the US. Hard to differentiate on those criteria. If you'd said "invades or bombs foreign countries on a whim", "kidnaps, imprisons and tortures nationals of any country without due process", I might have guessed.

While I do tend to refer to them as US citizens, the term "American" is not ambiguous.

After all the Brazilians usuallly call themselves Brazilians and not Americans. The Canadians would agree they're technically Americans, but they'd rather avoid the term and stick to being called Canadians. Same goes for the other countries.

Who else in the world would call themselves Americans? The people of the USA that's who. The ones who would hold a "world series" where the rest of the world doesn't show up. Or have an International Code Council that's not actually international, that creates an "International Building Code" that isn't, etc.

At least they've stuck to calling themselves "Americans" - would be a bit confusing if they enlarged their claim.

My kayak and various camping gear, workstands, tools, etc, don't fit on my bike, sorry. Bikes don't work so well in the winter to get to the mountains to ride my board either. And hundreds of miles of hilly roads aren't exactly fun on the bike, and not possible for a weekend away from work anyway.

But, to you city dwellers, enjoy. Some of us have good reason to own a car, and perhaps even a truck. Enjoy your concrete jungle that is so well suited to the skinny high pressure tires.

Put a 1955 Corvette next to any Corvette since 2000 to see what I mean. Remember, that '55 Vette cost about $2800 so you didn't have to be a partner in a law firm or a crooked derivatives trader to afford one.

Brilliant logic there, Holmes.

That $2800 in 1955 would have been a year's wages for a person with a good job, considering that minimum wage in 1955 was $0.75 an hour....

0.75 X 8hr/day X 5days/week = $30 / week, before tax.

It would take a minimum wage person in 1955 just under two years to be able to afford a Corvette, if they needed no money for _anything_ else, and paid no taxes.

MSRP for the base 2009 Corvette is $48,565. Current minimum wage is $7.25.

A company close to where I work will rent you a stretched version, a bit like a limo. Recently somebody (possibly the same company) tried to avoid an import tax on luxury cars by designating their hummers as buses.

A company close to where I work will rent you a stretched version, a bit like a limo.

The company that imported them into the UK has apparently stopped doing it, after one *fell apart* going over a bump. The normal chassis is barely up to the job, and splicing in an extra metre doesn't help.

Some people actually need a vehicle with more than 12 " ground clearance. Hopefully the H2 delivers this. The H3, OTOH, is a completely inappropriate tool for most anything. For status, get an Escalade. For function, get an H2. For panache, get a Caterpillar.

Mind you, my wife would buy an H1 if she could afford it. And she thinks a Core 2 Duo with a 20" monitor is excessive...

I find it hilarious that you're defending an H2 as a serious offroad vehicle instead of a fullsize chevy with a body kit. If you need 12" clearance, get a pickup and lift it a bit. At least you can get them in diesel.

Yeah calling a Hummer an off roader is pretty funny. You would think here in AR, land of the redneck, there would be plenty of those fugly things, but the only ones you ever see are being driven by doctors who not only never go off road but would have a coronary if they even got them dirty. The off roaders and the rest of us just laugh at those things and make "sorry about your penis" jokes.

Here it is the F150, the Ram and the Ranger. The Vulcan V6 Rangers actually are very popular for the off roaders here. They are light enough they rarely get stuck and have plenty of power and the cast iron V6 is tough as hell. I know I wouldn't give up my Vulcan Ranger for one of those sissy new Hummers if you paid me. The new ones look like a soccer mom ride, not a mud slinger.

I say let the Chinese have the damned things. Those things just don't compare to a well built Ford or Dodge truck. The only Hummers I ever see are being driven by doctors and lawyers who are afraid of scratching the paint, about like those Lincoln Navigators being driven by their wives. Why anybody would want a vehicle that sucked that much gas and cost so much they were afraid to really get anything done in it more than carrying groceries is beyond me. Good riddance.

It's nothing more than a marketing trick based on association with the military HMMWV, which worked brilliantly. The humvee is a vehicle to make its predecessor jeep proud. It has an angled independent suspension that puts the gear box, drive shaft and other parts well off the ground for huge clearance. It's a great off-road vehicle, reliable and rugged.

Civilian versions are nothing like that, since they're based off completely different chassis. But hey, they look pretty similar if and if you never take them off the road you probably won't even notice. So it's kinda like you own military hardware! How bad-ass!

Civilian versions are nothing like that, since they're based off completely different chassis.

h2 and h3, yes. the "h1", which was just "hummer" prior to the introduction of the 2 and 3, is pretty much a real humvee minus the.50-cal that goes in the middle. i imagine it'd make an awesome off-roader, though i've never bothered looking up any stats.

Are they simply licensing the brand and making completely different vehicles to Military Specs?

From what I'm told, AM General [amgeneral.com] makes the HumVee, which for the original Hummer, was sold to GM as-is (well, a stripped down version anyhow). GM then painted them, added luxuries and such and then sold them to the public. That's why the H2 and H3 were so different compared to the original H1 - GM does not own the design of the H1 at all - they merely resold the hardware after some modifications. The H2 and H3 were original GM designs.

So no, the Chinese are not getting military information out of it, other than perhaps how to add leather seats and cupholders to an existing H1.

that AM General is actually working with two chinese companies in helping them PRODUCE the H1. In fact, they have been doing so since the 80's for one and the 90's for the other. Besides, PLA already has PLENTY of western equipment as well as other items that classified.

The military (humvee) units are manufactured by AM General in Indiana. They sold the brand name to GM, who's now reselling it. The vehicles are built in Louisiana (?) (for the US) and South Africa (worldwide exports). Those plants will continue manufacturing them for at least another year. Maybe not the US one... I think most people who would buy a hummer would refuse to buy a chi-com hummer.

The military (humvee) units are manufactured by AM General in Indiana. They sold the brand name to GM, who's now reselling it. The vehicles are built in Louisiana (?) (for the US) and South Africa (worldwide exports).

The H1 was built by AM General, who makes the military HMMWV on which the H1 is based. Of the current models, the H2 is built by AM General under contract from GM (its a GM design, based on the same platform as the Yukon and Tahoe) in Indiana. The H3 (based on a different GM platform) is built in Louisiana and South Africa as you describe.

No, the HumVees were the originals. A Hummer is just a big, heavy HumVee-style body on an SUV chassis. At least, that's what they are now. The H1 was closer to the military version. Hummer on Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].

The Hummer H2 is a Chevy Tahoe with a lift, air lockers, and a nominal performance increase. The Hummer H3 is a newer, more lightweight vehicle, purpose-built or perhaps based on some other SUV, I'm not sure.

Don't forget the other modifications from the Tahoe. You know, the extra weight, woeful aerodynamics and awful use of interior space. It's kind of like an inverse-Tardis, it's smaller on the inside than it looks on the outside.

Neither. The military versions are called HMMV, which people tend to sound as HumVee. The GM product is called H1/H2/H3 Hummer and is based upon the Chevy Suburban Platform. Mainly the entire division is a marketing drone's wet dream as the best Mileage I've seen listed for the Hummer was 12MPG on the highway. Simply put, what killed the division is the low mileage and fuel guzzler tax here in the states because the vehicles simply couldn't get any mileage at all unlike the Real HMMV, that avgs. 20+mpg and the engine is a true multi-fuel capable. Primary is diesel but it will run on damn near anything including gasoline, ethonal and even what American's fondly call beer.

AM General licensed the manufacture of civilian version of the Hummer to GM. The Hummer you buy is actually a Suburban with a HMMWV shaped body on top. AM General High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle -M998 Truck has different design specs for the military vehicle. Here is some history about this:http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/hmmwv-hummer.htm [globalsecurity.org]

HumVees (HMMWVs) are made by AM General [amgeneral.com]. They sold the distribution rights of the civilian version, the H1 Hummer to GM. GM based the H2 and H3 Hummers on other civilian vehicle chassis. The H2/H3 vehicles share no mechanical systems or production facilities with the HMMWV.

Personnaly, I'd rather have a MegaCrusier [megacruiser.com] than any of these.

The real problem isn't that Hummer is sold, it is that the bankruptcy of GM and Chrysler have both been shoved down the companies and investor's throats. So they will trot out that they saved 3,000 or so jobs. What about the 100,000 plus jobs lost when all the dealerships are being forced to close, even ones who make a profit? A considerable number, if not the majority, of dealerships being punted are profitable.

This is all about Wall Street and not Main Street. The people tasked with doing these close outs and sales are all Wall Street regulars. If Wall Street had been held to the same standards as Detroit the change might have been something I could believe in. Instead communities are going to face real problems when dealerships close. Yeah, 3000 jobs is nice but it is a nickle on a Cadillac in terms of loss/gain. In other words, who the flip cares?

Hummer. Funny thing is they will survive in the real world and not the alternate reality world the US has become.

The "bankruptcy" is really just a wealth (for lack of a better word) transfer. And by transfer, I mean theft. Contract law was ignored when deciding what secured debt holders deserved. Tim Geithner's hand is shoved up the banks, GM, and Chrysler like a ventriloquist dummy, so they can do nothing but nod their heads. Not that the banks mind too much -- the revolving door between treasury, federal reserve, and the investment banks looks like a bukake session with you and i in the middle.

I mean seriously, who in their right freaken mind would ever buy any of the assets from GM? Oh gee, 1 used car manufacturing plant building outdated vehicles! Yeah that will work REALLY well.

While I agree that there is contract law it does not matter squat if thousands of people get unemployed, the economy collapses, etc. And as a matter of fact contract law was not ignored. What happened is that a majority of people agreed with the terms and a small minority disagreed! In fact I

I mean seriously, who in their right freaken mind would ever buy any of the assets from GM?

Well, this Chinesse company, for one...

And anyone who can read a report on GM's actual assets. If Clinton had gotten first-world healthcare for the United States when he tried. GM would be as solid today as friggin' Microsoft. And if GM could have waved a magic wand and lost its retiree debt, we might have flying cars by now.

at the gas station in Wisconsin where I got "told" by a guy bitching about my Toyota.

Despite the fact that my truck is built in Texas by Americans with 85% US content apparently the "profits" all go back to "Japan" SO THERE! (never mind Toyota being on the NYSE and the "profits" go to the shareholders...)I can't imagine what this guy will do now when a new Hummer - built in Louisiana by Americans, but owned by the Chinese - pulls up to the pump!

Reminds me of the "Buy American" bumper sticker I saw on a Ford Courier... sort of makes you want to pull the driver over and explain to them that a Courier was just a Mazda B2000 with different badges and a higher price tag. Hondas are made in Marysville, Ohio with electrical parts from Stanley -- there is no such thing as a truly "American" or "Japanese" car anymore.

I wonder if it's just the "Buy American" bumper stickers that are laughable.

There was a spot on the news last night where a retired couple who invested their retirement savings in GM bonds were interviewed. The husband was a tool and die maker in the auto industry, and both the husband and wife considered it their patriotic duty to invest in America. And if the American flag seen waving in the background was any indication, advocate the same to others.

Needless to say their investments were wiped out.

The post-war industrial strength of America may have existed for their parents when they retired (and their parents before them), but an investment strategy that involves a troubled industry and a company that routinely posted huge losses is indicative more of nostalgic yearnings than common sense.

My own take is that the couple's situation could be considered laughable, as in "I invested in America and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.", but they didn't even get a T-shirt.

Ya well people just want something to be stupid and patriotic about I guess. With the multi-national nature of the world these days, it gets rather silly to identify a company as a given nationality anyhow. Like Intel for example. It is an American company in that it is headquartered in the US and started there. Ok, but that isn't the only place its operations are. You can very well buy an Intel chip that was designed in the US, fabricated in Ireland, packaged in Costa Rica, and then sold in Canada. They've got various parts of their operation all over. While most of their fabs are in the US (one is in Ireland, two in Israel, 12 in the US) all their packaging and testing centres are outside the US. Likewise their R&D are in the US, but also Israel, China, Korea, Russia and so on.

So is Intel really an "American" company? They really seem more global.

They are not alone in this. That's how many major companies work. As you noted, the Japanese car makers are heavily producing in America these days. Makes a lot of sense, there are skilled workers, lots of land, good natural resources and a large consumer base. Why spend the money shipping the things over from Japan is they are mostly sold in the US? For that matter, some lines are completely produces in the US, even the ones sold in Japan.

While I understand the desire to protect American jobs, that doesn't mean the company has to be headquarted in America. There are American companies that produce nothing in the US, and their are foreign companies that produce lots in the US. Really they are all global companies and their country of origin is largely incidental.

As another interesting statistic, it's important to point out the the US's GNP is still slightly higher than its GDP.

In other words, the value of goods produced in the US is roughly equal to the value of goods produced by US-owned companies and American citizens. For every foreign-owned factory in the US, there's another US-owned factory someplace else in the world.

(Of course, as with any economic statistic, it's not quite that simple. However, the fact that both figures are roughly equivalent is a good sign)

Indeed. We somehow managed convince a nation of one billion mostly intelligent people to not only give us valuable goods in exchange for worthless green paper, but also to accept even more worthless representations of pieces of worthless green paper made on the tiny magnetic domains of a cheap piece of rust-covered glass in an undisclosed location in lieu of actual worthless paper...

Now when do you think Chevron and Exxon will start licensing the patents the own on electric vehicle technology? Looking at their oil profits these days, I'd say after half of the Caribbean is under water.

And there's been manufacturers that made them over the years since then, too. It's doubtful that they'd have had mass appeal if GM had started manufacturing the EV1 10 years ago, because 1) gas was still cheap, and 2) there were still some technological barriers in place. The combonation of those two factors is what prevented the electric car from being manufactured en masse, not GM's decision not to ke

While the Humvee is a good mil truck. The H2 is basically a Suburban and the H3 is basically a POS that was a failed attempt to capitalize on the desire of those who wished to own a H2 but couldn't afford one.

There is irony that a Chinese company now owns the brand, but I am not going to back that up with how.

Keep plowing ahead ignoring your customers.After all, they'll buy what you damn well want them to buy, right? Wrong. GM had piss-poor leadership, management with no vision. They kept making product that no one wanted to buy. The market handled GM alright.

Now, just think if GM had treated every potential customer that entered a dealership as a criminal.

Watch out RIAA/MPAA your industries are next. The market will handle you as well.

People bought GM just fine, the issue became the $4/gal($8/gal Canada) for fuel, and then the massive credit collapse.

They should have seen $4 gasoline coming, and even before the credit collapse they were losing massive amounts of money. GM's entire philosophy over the last fifteen years was to make large profits selling luxury trucks and SUV's, and they declined to invest in the future or diversify their products. Toyota and Honda spent that same period of time investing in hybrid technology and fuel

I think the important issue from GP post is that GM is merely a side effect of more general problem US (and to less extent UK) economy has - they let the finance industry grow without any limits and it did grow to the point that it was more reasonable to invest in snake oil eeeee virtual financial products 'decoupled' from reality then into something real. The consequence as could have been expected was the demise of other industries and growing of bubbles wherever virtual wealth tried to become real exactl

I think the important issue from GP post is that GM is merely a side effect of more general problem US (and to less extent UK) economy has...

But that was my point. GM is not merely a side effect of a more general problem in the US. The financial crisis has finished off GM, but they were already losing money before the economy dropped off a cliff. They didn't go bankrupt because the economy collapsed, they went bankrupt because they were mismanaged. They couldn't afford to stay in business, even with the government giving them billions of dollars a month. Somehow Ford, the European automakers, and the Japanese automakers all managed to stay solvent in the same market.

I doubt the Chinese are interested in building Hummers. However, they are very very interested in owning the intellectual property rights to certain components such as engines and transmissions. Once they are legally in the clear and have a good design, they will be able to build and sell a car for the US market.

I'm not sure what they want, but they are getting the tech, the brand, the manufacturing plant and let's not forget the distribution network.

The buyer, Sichuan Tengzhong, looks like an interesting company. They manufacture heavy equipment, special-use vehicles, highway & bridge structural components, construction machinery and energy facilities. That's a varied mix, but I don't see passenger autos in there. They've been in business since 2005. They are a private company; I'm not sure where they get